, 1887-12-01
What He Has to Say About the
Public Domain.
He is DESTROYS Of Giving Settlers
a Show.
LAMAR's REPORT.


port Is that part relating to the adjust
nleit of railway land grants. IL is as iol
lows: "ShOrtly after my appointment
when became somewhat familiar witt
| the pibic land systeul,and workings there
Oi, became impressed with the tact tha
the public domain was being diverted from
its legitimate purpose, aud converted to u D
iect, the inevitable ELECTS of which were re
| pugnant to the theory on which the lam,
system is based Apart from meihud
of illegal appropriation oi the pub ic do
main effected through the prrversion o
several laws for acquiring title thereto,
became convinced That the administration
of congressional grants to wagon and tt
| railroads had gwen rise to enormous
abuse Congress had not only made grants
| wherein some instances exceeded III extent
the area Of a half dozen OF the largest and
most populous states vt the union, but IL
addition provided that any losses oi Ian d:
within the granted limits should he salts
| fled by selections of lands within adjoining
limits, thus nearly doubling the area OF the
original grants. Under these acts the land
department had withdrawn from public APP
preparation not only granted limits, AS re-
qured by law, but also, lands within in
demnity limits ut the request of grantee
| companys, Thus an enormous quantity oI
public lands were held in reservation t.
await the convenience of corporations in
| the construction of their road, to make Sc
4 lCCllOIS VI llS luuuS, anu tHt uINtl sun
| justment of grants by the department.
do not nean to question the wisdom OF
aiding in the construction of railroads.
That policy was at the time wise one,
but in the light of experience it may be
we'll to ask whether II would not have been
wiser to have aided the great enterprises
otherwise than by grants OF the public do
main. Though much good has been
wrought, the legislation ny which these
vast territories have passed under the do
minion OF railroad companies gave all in
durable wound to the homestead scheme
before that scEe eme had fair opportunity
of displaying its benefit. Its land grant
lie Iislution was certainly not in harmony
with the theory OF distribution Of the pub
lie doAIHin among the people. and gave up
to capitalists as u basis for traffic and spec
ulation and gigantic financial schemes,
what was the origin Il policy ot the govern
ment designated as homes for an iudustri-
Gus aud thrifty people, the abodes "i do.
nestle happiness aud virtue. Notwith-
standing these indemnity Withdrawals were
made exclusively tor the interests oi com
panies, few OF these, if any, Constructed
their roads within the time prescribed in
the granting act, as an express condition on
which the grant was made. Maps of Il
probable" general" "designateh," and
'definite" routes of roads were filed with
rapidity in the department and withdraw
ais hereunder aske and almost invariably
granted, until the public land of the states
and territories were gridironed over with
railroad grants and indemnity limits, and
in many Instances, the limits of one road
overlapping and conflicting with other
roads in the most bewildering manner 81
that q settler seeking a home could scarcely
find II desirable location that was not claim
ed by some. one, or perhaps two or three
roads, to which grants OF land had been
made. Though desired tract might not
be apparently covered by railroad luca-
ton, the settler would hardly select it be-
fore the agents ot corporations would set
up a claim to it or the right to occupy and
dtnude it under the right OF way and con-
struction privileges conferred by the grant
ing act. Thus, the settler ignorant OF his
legal rights and no one to advise him.
with respect To either law or facts, would,
for the sake of peace. readily consent To ptr-
chase from the company. In tins way these
corporations, i'll addition to lands granted
them, have claimed, sold and received the
price OF great deal of other land To which
they had no legal right. Confusion, hard
ship and imposition were practiced upon
settlers, greatly increased by the hold
schemes OF corporate agents where WITH
drawals have been made OF lands TO which
legal title of companies was not attached,
and which afterwards remained in the sarle
condition for years through the failures of
congress to make necessary appropriations
for surveys. When, however through par.
tial surveys, or adjustments OF grants, lands
thus sold by a company were iound 10 De
outside of grants. aud determined by the
department 10 be public land, the purchaser
from the company found himself in the
unfortunate predicament ofhaving lost both
his money and hls land generally without
means To enter into costly litigation with n
po owerful corporation, deprivation OF ms
home, the expenditure aud waste OF his
years, his energy aud strength in redeeming
L., ~. wild lnnlitinn render
ed his most technical right Ct action against
the company but little inore than u mock
ery. Years have elapsed since MANY OF the
grants have been made and other years
since Withdrawal. Some companies
have constructed the entire line OF
only, and Others again none at all. The
Withdrawals of lands were no less effective
as a barrier against settlers in one case than
in Others. 1t mattered not what might be
his equities acquired by years OF toll upon
what he believed to be part of the national
hiphest judicial tribunal, rs expounded
| by the highest law officers OF the execu'
| tive, that withdrawal once made by
coInpetcnt authority was legal and effective
to exclude all from intrusion within its
limits.
| injustice, were about to be inflicted under
! the law came under your observation
Guilford Miller settled upon lands after
wards selected and claimed by the Northern
Pacific railroad company to be within
withdrawal for indemnity purposes. Some
doubt arising as to the legality, that with
drawal case was referred by this depart
ment to the attorney general for his opin,
| ion. That officer held that the Withdrawal
was legal and that during its existence
Miller could acquire no right of title to the
tract claimed by him and on which he
lived. Whilst recognizing the correctness
of the law, you saw the injustice OF the case
so lar as the individual settler was affected
and that hundreds of Others were similarly
treated who might be effected and you di'
rected that such grant should be so aunlih'
isrered by this department IL possible to
protect these settlers from such injustice